Roads Department

of the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure of Georgia

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of Works for the Improvement of Chumateleti-Khevi Section of E-60 Highway

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

of

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Report

January 2017

Introduction

The Government of Georgia is implementing a program to upgrade the major roads of the country, managed by the Roads Department (RD) of the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure (MRDI). The program aims to improve transportation and transit of goods to surrounding countries, which is a significant and growing contributor to GDP. Transport of goods into and through Georgia has increased over the past 10-15 years as markets have expanded following the breakup of the Soviet Union, and Georgia is now a major transit country. Almost two-thirds of goods in Georgia are transported by road, and haulage by domestic and international truck companies is very evident on the country’s highways. However, many roads are poorly equipped to cope with the volume of traffic and the proportion of heavy vehicles, and factors such as insufficient dual carriageways, routing through inhabited areas and inadequate maintenance and repair, hinder throughputs and increase transit times. This creates difficulties for haulage companies and their clients, truck drivers, Georgian motorists and local residents.

The critical target of the program for upgrading major roads in Georgia is the E-60 or the East-West Highway (EWH) - the main route to neighboring Azerbaijan and Russia, also connecting to Turkey and Armenia. For planning purposes, the EWH has been divided into sections of various lengths. The World Bank is providing series of loans to the Government of Georgia for upgrading this highway through East West Highway Improvement Projects (EWHIPs). Three projects of these series are now completed covering the highway section between Agaiani and Agara. EWHIP-4 and East West Highway Corridor Improvement Project (WEHCIP) are currently under implementation covering the sections Agara to ZemoOsiauri and ZemoOsiauri to Chumateleti (shortly before Rikoti tunnel, which takes the EWH from East Georgia to the West).

The next section of EWH targeted for the improvement lies between Chumateleti and Khevi, and includes construction of an additional tunnel through Rikoti mountain pass. Preparatory work for this investment is being financed from EWHCIP and includes conduct of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the proposed infrastructure. Civil works in this section may be supported with the Additional Financing to the EWHCIP as well as from the sources other than the World Bank.

Objective of the ESIA

Objective of the conductedESIA was to identify expected positive and negative environmental and social impacts of the improvement and operation of EWH between Chumateleti and Khevi in the construction and operation phases;identify likelihood, magnitude and spread of these impacts; and work out measures for avoiding or mitigating these impacts. ESIA contributed to the analysis of routing and design alternatives and the selection of the solutions most suitable from economic, fiscal, technical, social and environmental perspectives. The ESIA report includes an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) which will become a part of the contract for the provision of upcoming civil works and serve as a field guide for good environmental performance mandatory for adherence by contractor.

Environmental Screening Outcome

Under the Article 4, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph "j" of the Law of Georgia on Environmental Impact Permit, construction of international and intrastate highways and railways, bridges and underway crossings beneath them, as well as engineering structures for the protection of highways, railways and their territories is subject to the State ecological examination. Therefore, improvement of Chumateleti-Khevi section of the EWH is subjected to the ecological examination and issuance of an environmental permit. The permit is to be issued based on the expert conclusion of the State Ecological examination by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia (MENRP).

According to the requirements of the World Bank's safeguard policy OP / BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, upgrading of EWH fall under environmental Category A requiring a full-scale ESIA and the development of an ESMP.

Public Participation

The Bank policies and the Georgian legislation require meaningful public participation and involvement in the process of ESIA and environmental management planning. The main principles of the public consultation include:

  • Conduct of at least two public consultation meetings for environmental Category A activities: one at the early stage for agreeing on the Terms of Reference (ToR) of the ESIA and the approach to this study and the second – at the final stage of the process to discuss the draft ESIA report;
  • Prior disclosure of the documents to be publicly discussed, and announcement of the time and venue of the consultation meeting through central and local means of public communication;
  • Invitation of written comments/questions on the draft ESIA; and
  • Incorporation of public feedback into the ESIA report and re-disclosure of the finalized document.

RD carried out the public consultation meeting on ToR for the ESIA on May 6, 2016. As part of the ESIA, consultations were held in September 2016 with the owners and employees of businesses located in the vicinity of the highway corridor, as well as with individual entrepreneurs.Information-sharing meetings were also held with the representatives of Khashuri municipality and population of Khevi village. The draft ESIA report will be posted on the web page of the MRDI. Hard copies of the document will be made available at the offices of Khashuri local self-governments located in the vicinity of the EWH, RD, and the office of Eco-Spectri Ltd.

RD will organize a public consultation meetings to discuss the draft ESIA report as well as the draft Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). Members of the potentially affected communities, including elected officials, as well as representatives of the local small and medium businesses and other stakeholders will be invited. RD will seek questions and comments from the stakeholders and will incorporate received feedback into the ESIA report, as appropriate.

Sensitive Environmental Receptors and Potential Impacts

The EWH section covered by this ESIA is 11.2 km long, out of which 2.4 km is the length of two tunnels to be constructed. In terms of environmental and social sensitivities, this section and the adjacent territory may be divided into four categories: (i)section from Chumateleti to the East portal of the Rikoti tunnel (1.5 km, including a smaller tunnel with the length of 0.7 km); (ii) coupled Rikoti tunnel (1.7 km); (iii) section from the West portal of the tunnel up to village Khevi (5 km); and (iv) village Khevi (3 km).

The main environmental impacts are expected at the construction phase and come from clearing of the right-of-way (RoW), establishment/operation of work camps and temporary access roads, operation/servicing of construction machinery, massive excavation works required for the tunnel construction and works near waterway.

Clearing of the RoW will in certain areas will imply de-listing of land plots from the State Forest Fund. Drilling of the new tube of the Rikoti tunnel will generate vast volume of excess material and its disposal in the environmentally decent way will be a challenge both technically and financially. Establishment of construction camps and access roads will be associated with the generation of solid waste and wastewater, compression of soil, and noise related nuisance. Parking, operating and servicing of construction machinery will carry the risk of operational spills of oils and lubricants (i.e. the risk of soil pollution) and generation of noise, vibration, dust, and emissions. It is expected that the construction material will be purchased from suppliers licensed to operate quarries or borrow pits. License for use of natural resources - in case the contractor decides to use own quarries/borrow pits - will be obtained by the contractor from the National Environment Agency of the MENRP. Construction works will also have implications for the occupational health and safety of workers/personnel.

Impacts of the new road during its operation phase are less diverse. Environmental aspects of the highway operation will be air pollution from automobile emissions, and pollution of soil with litter and drainage from the highway as well as water pollution with liquid/powder cargo and/or fuel and lubricants from the cars as a result of traffic accidents on the road section and runoff from the road. Project design brings the risks of negative impacts on environment to the feasible minimum. Provision for road safety, control over the operation of the Rikoti tunnel, and traffic regulation will contribute to managing risks of accidents. Installation of noise barriers is not required. Traffic safety will be an important issue with health, social, and environmental implications.

Direct social impact of the construction in the first and third sections will affect catering facilities (9) located adjacent to the highway, fueling station (1) and individual road-side vendors whose work is seasonal and lasts for 3 or 4 months a year. As of October 2016, some 14 individual traders were found within the subject section of the EHW corridor. 13 of them were interviewed (1 of them refused). Based on the information obtained from the respondents, the number of vendors is much higher (by 2, 5 or 3 times). They are mainly residents of the adjacent villages and trade with their own harvest (fruit, corn, honey, etc.).All physical and legal bodies affected by the project will receive adequate compensation, amount of which will be specified during preparation of the Resettlement Action Plan.

Village Khevi is located on the both sides of the highway, stretching over the distance of about 3 km. in fact, the highway divides the village into two parts. At present, there are 12 access roads connecting village to the highway. In addition, present configuration of the highway allows pedestrians to cross the highway at any point. This facilitates the movement of the village residents from one part of the village to another. Also, there is a 3 km local motor road branching out from the highway that leads to village Tsakvi. This road provides the only motor access the village with 80 homesteads. Reconstruction of the EWH will result in displacement of road-side small businesses, and alter motor and pedestrian communication within and around Khevi village. Compensation and alternative connectivity will be provided.

Project Alternatives

No-project scenario

No “showstoppers” have been identified during ESIA and the anticipated impacts can be managed by application of adequate construction standards and good environmental practices. Nonetheless, a “no-project” option was considered as one of the project alternatives. While it has no environmental and social impacts resulting from the construction works, continuing operation of the highway in its current poor condition would have negative environmental and social impacts from traffic jams, noise, low speed, and high emissions. In the future, with consideration of the anticipated increase of the traffic flow, the situation will worsen. On the global scale, under the "no-project" scenario, local communities would lose opportunity of benefiting from all positive effects associated with the highway improvement, including profits resulting from increased cargo turnover and tourism. Therefore, as the potential positive impacts of the project surpass its possible negative impacts, the “no-project” option was discarded.

Alternatives for placement of Rikoti tunnel tube

Two alternative routes for drilling the additional tube of the Rikoti tunnel were considered. As per the first alternative, the length of the tunnel would be 2,100 m commencing from the starting point of the bypass road of the existing tunnel and following the existing tunnel from the south, with its west portal to be placed on the right bank of river Rikotula. As for the second alternative, the new tube would run south the existing one and in parallel to it, and will have the length of 1,800 m. Comparing these two alternatives showed that the potential environmental impacts of both of them are equal; however, under alternative 1, the amount of the excess material to be generated is higher than with alternative 2. This is a disadvantage of alternative 1, as disposal of the excess material will be pretty problematic. In addition, the longer the section of the tunnel, the more vulnerable it will be in a hydro-geological respect. With consideration of these factors, alternative 2 is preferable.

Alternatives of the road corridor

For approximately 7.5 km of the highway westwards from the West portal of the tunnel, feasibility of two alternative routes had been studied for placement of the two additional lanes of the highway. Under alternative 1, these new lanes would be separated from the existing ones passing on the right bank of river Rikotula and follow a new alignment on the left bank of the river. This would require clearing and cutting of the forested mountain slope, and building of additional bridges and overpasses. Alternative 2 implied widening the existing corridor on the right bank of the river Rikotula to place additional two lanes adjacent to the present ones.

The main criterion of selection between these two alternatives was the landscape and its geological structure. Several active landslide areas areregistered on the right bank of Rikotula River adjacent to the existing road. The slope here is very steepAnd thebedrock is not strong. Hence the gravitational effects are significant. Several landslides have been activated on this slope quire recently (2014). Several thousand cubic meters of earth and rock collapsed, completely blocking the highway and paralyzing the traffic.Collapsed materialwas used for widening the road towards the Rikotula River bed, since additional cutting of landslide areas was not considered appropriate. In addition to the above, alternative 2 would require cutting larger volumes of rock and earth for widening the road corridor on the right bank as compared to the amount of spoil which would be generated through building corridor for the additional two lanes on the left bank of the river. Given that disposal of excess material is problematic, this argument is also significant. Negative aspect of alternative 1 is that it implies removal of forest cover along the strip of land to be cleared for the construction on the left bank of the river and certain impact on the habitat integrity caused by limiting animal’s fee access to the river bank.

Careful assessment of these two alternatives showed overall advantage of alternative 1, as mitigation of its negative impacts is technically more feasible and financially more affordable than coping with the persistent geohazards related to alternative 2.

Project Description

The EWH section to be upgraded between Chumateleti and Khevi is classified as a road of the “international importance”, with the design speed fixed at 80 km/h.

Construction of two tunnels is planned within the 11.2 km zone of the project area, the length of which are 0.7 km and 1.7 km. Eight existing and new bridges have been proposed within the framework of feasibility study. Locations and length of these bridges may be changed at the detailed design stage.

The cross section of the road will be 26 m, with 13 m each side. The center mall will be 5 m wide. The shoulders will be 3 m and 0.5 m wide, the edges will have the gradient of 2.5% and the width of the roadway on both sides will be 7 m each. As for the sections of bridges, the one-side bridge will be 13.5 m wide, including the emergency side tracks and zone for repairs.

The minimal parameters of the cross section of the tunnel are as follows:

  • Min. vertical size: 5.0 m;
  • Lane width: 3.75 მ (100 km), 3.50 m (80 km);
  • Min. shoulder width:0.25 მ (edge line);
  • Min. pathway width: 0.75 m;
  • Pathway height: 0.15 m.

Approximately 200 people will be employed during the construction stage, with 60-70% of them as local people. Hence no tangible influx of work force is expected.

ESIA Methodology

The ESIA process consisted of the six main activities that are common for similar studies conducted according to the international standards:

  1. Collection of baseline data describing biophysical and social environment within the study area; desk studies and field surveys to address identified gaps in the existing data; update of information on topics and areas where significant negative impacts are expected.
  2. Identification of the expected positive and negative impacts of the proposed works on the highway and of its operation thereafter; assessment of the likelihood and significance of the potential negative impacts; and development of mitigation measures.
  3. Analysis of alternatives in terms of location, technology, design and operation, including the "no-project" alternative.
  4. Development of the Environmental Management Plan.
  5. Drafting of the ESIA report.
  6. Information disclosure and stakeholder consultation.

Baseline Information